Super cool! The lens cone idea is great! Another idea is to use a small sliding box system attached to the front instead of the lens cone which will enable you to adjust focus on the fly. And with your carpentry skills, making a double sided film holder isn't out of the question! Which would give you the ability to frame and focus with ground glass. I made some 8x10 holders using just a table saw, clamps, and glue... Those first 2 pics would have worked well as negatives for contact prints. I found indoor paper reversals using artificial lights shoot around ISO 0.4! I think that's because paper is not very sensitive to yellowish light compared to blue/UV light. And calculating in bellows extension is a must when focusing close. I'm estimating that the lens is around 800mm in front of the film plane, so if you're using a 500mm lens, the bellows extension would be 2.5, meaning and extra 1.3 stops in exposure. Keep going! It's fun seeing you experiment!
Ok so I'm already planning on maybe, after a long project with this camera, making a similar style camera but quite a bit smaller, maybe 8x10 or maybe 11x14, and maybe incorporating some of the concepts you mention, like maybe a ground glass. You're dead right about the indoor shooting. I haven't found huge differences on previous shoots using paper reversal and artificial lights, but it was so apparent this time around. Definitely daylight is the way forward for this camera at least. Contact prints are something I haven't really looked into, but several people have mentioned it on previous videos, especially as a way of "saving" under exposed reversals. I'll work on that when I get back, I think I can pretty much know now at the first development stage if it's going to reverse well. So I should have both processes ready, if it doesn't go dark enough then I put it through a standard stop and fix, and contact print laster. Definitely something I'll be trying! That's some great estimating! Box is 580mm and the cone is 170mm, so 650mm overall. So I definitely didn't give it enough compensation until the final shots! Lesson learned!
They were so good. And for a 6 and 8 year old, sitting still for an 8 second exposure, they did an amazing job! I can't wait to get back to it in May and really put the camera and lens to the test!
Ha! Doesn't get much more basic than this! I think the next plan, after I've done a decent sized project with this one, will be to build something similar but slightly smaller. I have some beautiful c 1900 lenses which would cover probably 12x16 or 11x14. Would be fun to put some of those combos together in a more manageable package!
@@the120ist Yes as you said no a ‘travel’ camera. But I am confident that not many of us have the gumption to build what you have. I’ll stick to what others have manufactured. To that end just bought a reasonable priced Horseman VH (without rangefinder) 6 x9 in minty condition from Japan. Looking forward to getting out with it.
Dont be disapointed. Im very impressed by the built and the print with your friend. The tones and exposure are awesome (I love darker prints) . Bokeh is fantastic. Maybe you explained it but I didnt understand how do you calculate the length of the box. To me it's brilliant built. Im so thrilled.
Thank you so much! I replied to your insta comment, didn't realise you had already watched! Glad you enjoyed it. We're all our own worst critics aren't we? I so wanted that great image to end the video. But so be it, some good results for sure. I'll email you about with the equation, too much to explain here!
Great project! Myself and Ethan Moses of Cameradactyl Cameras have done some B/W reversal work in handmade box cameras. The metering is difficult because the paper is UV & deep blue sensitive but light meters don’t read the UV light, so it requires some extrapolation. In the winter expect less UV in daylight, for example. Ethan has taken to using powerful strobe packs for indoor portraits, you can feel the heat on your face when they fire!
Strobes I think are a good way forward, for sure. There's a video coming up very soon where I use strobes with this process, but on 4x5, and my results were disappointing. I just don't have the power (yet) to make it work. Even double pumping the strobes was only just enough. I'm searching ebay... hold that thought!
@@the120ist Ethan uses huge power supplies with something like 2400 watt-seconds or more, the strobes themselves have giant glass flash tubes with incandescent model lights and fans built in.
Just amazing, very inspiring. It also really shows how photography started. The effort you put into that project is awesome. I was smiling the whole video through. Thanks for sharing
great video. a few years ago, I prototyped with a cardboard sliding camera with a 36" aerial lens and it was fun. for results that are too dark, probably can immerse in a very diluted farmers reducer to get back some details.
Lots of great comments here on rescuing those underexposed images. I definitely think that's something I need to look at on future shoots - either picking them it first development stage and instead of reversing, run them through a standard process and setting them aside as paper negatives for contact printing. Or as you say, farmers reducer, or beaching and toning to recover then after reversing. Seems like I have some more experimenting to do!
that was absolutely amazing that was a lot of hard work you did i think all the photos were great yes you should do this again when you get home in the better weather your images have a great look to them and very artistic i build medium format and 5x4 cameras myself for fun and really patriciate all the work and effort you put into this ive never built anything this big the biggest ive gone was converting and rebuilding a late 1800s half plate camera to modern 5x4 but i prefer to stick to 120 film camera builds from 6x9cm up to 6x12cm and ive a 6x14cm its great to see someone else building cameras thanks for making this video im looking forward to your next one
I think it's fantastic that you achieved what you did. I've just developed my first prints ever using a Johnson's Jumbo Postcard Enlarger and I was over the moon when I got some useable prints out of it. Keep up the good work, I enjoy watching your videos.
Thanks so much! Definitely a very rewarding moment when you get a decent print out of any process! I wish I had had just a little more time to get this to a point where I felt confident I understood the camera. But time waits for no man! I'll be back to this project before you know it!
I'm building a very similar thing, both size and concept... Main difference is that I have a film holder and a matte screen. Also I have two separate boxes, one smaller can slide inside the bigger one, so I can also focus.
I have 10" (254mm) f4.5 portrait lens I have used in my 1915 Korona View 8x10 but the poor old thing is not liking being used very often, so I am in the process of building a similar camera. I had not thought about using a lens cone to create a pair of focusing ranges. Very cool camera and now you've given me some new ideas.
Definitely go for it! And if you're making an 8x10 box then it would be soo much easier than this beast. It wasn't a surprise, but the size of the whole process, the trays, the camera, the paper, it all really adds up and makes it exhausting. But I would say an 8x10 would be so much easier to handle. let me know if you do it!
Thank you so much! I'm glad you enjoyed it! I can't wait to get back and carry on with the project now. Plus so many great ideas for how I can adapt the concept and expand it. Roll on May!
They're growing on me! As always, if I head meant them to be dark I would have felt better about them! But I was trying for correct exposure and I missed the mark. But with hindsight, and a lot of people in the comments saying they like them, I think I'm feeling better about them!!
I know it took a long time, I'm sorry! I almost got bored of hearing myself talk about it!! But it was a long project for me, and if I had had the time it would have gone on even longer because I was so not ready to give up! I wanted a perfect image to take away. But it was not to be. I'll be back with this camera in a few months, and we're going to make some awesome images!
Going to make another pitch for you to try making your own gelatin dry plates. You’re already learning about the color sensitivity and speed, and when making your own plates, you can eventually learn to tweak both. Which hopefully will get you to the point where the exposures don’t have to be as long as what you’re dealing with, even with overcast skies. I’ve also built a camera around an air reconnaissance lens (a 24” f/6 beast of a hunk of glass) but mine was made out of cardboard (save the lens mount of course), a sliding box design. Much much flimsier, but it went together in a weekend. After seeing your results, i think I need to make a more rugged one so I can take it outside more easily. Great project!
Your wishes are not going unheard! It's on the list, it's coming! Interestingly, with this camera I could get a glass plate the size of the back easily enough, and I could coat it, after doing some practice with the technique... but I would need to come up with some means of offsetting the focus by the mm thickness of the glass plate. Hmmmm...
@ even a cm or two of sliding capability somewhere in the lens path would give you that. Don’t need a full on helical or anything more complicated. Maybe even just mount the lens cone on coarse thread bolts with a gasket of some kind to allow adjustments. I’m sure you’ll work it out. Looking forward to what you come up with!
What a great video. Cool project but I do worry for your back. It must have been so cool to see that image appear on the back of the box. My only suggestion would be to add some rails/guides to slot the paper in.
Thank you! I didn't quite get an image I was totally happy with, but I was close. And I'm happy knowing that the camera is going to work, and given a little more time and some better weather, and a little more experience of the lens and what it can do,I think I'm going to be able to get some great images from this! Roll on May!
Welcome to Toronto. Large film community here. Check out Gallery 44. At first I thought you were going for the Afghan box camera effect, with developing done inside. This looks far more practical. Would it be possible to focus through a small ground glass attached to one side or the top? The framing would be different, of course. But you wouldn't be dependent on the more or less taut strap measure -- and you'd be able to load the paper in the camera beforehand. (Impressive results, all the same.)
Thank you! I've already had a bit of a tour out here, visited Downtown Camera and Henrys and Graination! I'm not sure I'll be doing darkroom work while I'm here, I think that may have to wait until I get back. I think I'll let someone else process my films, will be a nice break from it! I never considered the Afghan camera option. I have a bit of an OCD hatred of mess, and I would be so concerned about spilling chemicals in the camera! Plus I would have had to have a box the same size but for a smaller print. Pros and cons though! So the long term plan with this camera is to use the huge black towel which you saw in this video and try to get a decent seal around the top of the camera so that I can load the sheets without taking the camera back into the darkroom. That way I can use a piece of paper against the back wall to frame and focus, and then load the sheet when i'm happy. Then hopefully I can get the exposed sheet into a sleeve and load another one out in the field. I'm working on how I would make that happen!!
The last ones turned out ok I thought! Can't wait to get back and start a longer project with this camera... after some more fine tuning to get more reliable results of course!
This is very interesting. I have longed for an Afghan camera for years.. There is a youth projects that creates them, both in kit form and assembled. There quiet expensive for a wooden box. But there Labour intensive. Google instant box camera. It's an interesting design & I believe the person running the projects has tested many attempts, before e came to.a wining model. Many the for bringing this to you tube.
Thanks for watching and commenting! I'll look up those Afghan cameras you mention, but it doesn't surprise me that they seem pricey. Not much to stop you making your own though. I have very limited carpentry skills and equipment, as you saw, but the box is hiding together!
A few people suggesting this... and actually, at time of taking that image indoors, I hadn't tested the process with flash. Since then though I have. The next video coming to the channel I shot before I left the UK, and I do exactly that. And I can tell you, having tried it, that if I had used flash on that indoor shot with the big box camera, it wouldn't have worked. Even using every studio strobe and flashgun that I own all rigged up together, I don't have enough flash power to expose the paper. The general assumption is that you can get more power from a flash than from constant lights, whereas in fact with constant lights you can get a lot more light, if given the time to accumulate exposure. I haven't done the math, but six flash guns and a 400w/s strobe firing together (total of about 700w/s) gave me the equivalent exposure of about 3 seconds of constant lighting with the ones I had set up. So for a seven second exposure we'd be looking at pumping the full flash set up 3 times to get an equivalent exposure!
Hi, could you not cut a small hole in the lens board near the lens to allow you to put your video camera lens in facing the film plane to allow you to preview the composition and focussing?
It's definitely an idea. I'd need to have a piece of white paper against the back to show the image though. And the major problem I have at the moment is having to remove the camera to load the light sensitive paper, and in the process ruining the careful focusing and framing which I've just done! So the first thing I need to fix is being able to load in situ. I have some ideas, and have received some good ideas from others, about maybe keeping the paper packet inside the camera, maybe installing a thin false bottom to prevent reflections. Lots to think about!
...also, have you been consulting a reciprocity failure chart for your emulsion? You seem to be regularily surprised by unexpected recurring underexposure despite careful metering with fancy meter.
I show my failures on this channel, I always have. If you would prefer a channel where people hide their mistakes then there are plenty of those for you. I carefully meter and apply learning from past experience into each exposure. But as mentioned on another reply to you, there are a lot of factors. I don’t always go through every detail in the videos because that would be boring. In this video I added a stop of exposure to the second shoot, but it seems the lights indoors, on this occasion, in contrast to previous instances where I have used artificial light with this process (and indeed as you have suggested I do), have not reacted with the paper in the same way, and my additional exposure on top of the original calculations, resulted in poorly exposed images, as you saw. As I say, if you would like perfection in every frame, there are lots of channels for you.
@the120ist Hey, thanks for your replies. Im sorry if my comments seemed abrasive or judgemental. I was just trying to be succint and relevant. I greatly appreciate your style of vlogging - of all the photography channels I watch from time to time, yours is in the top three, with Pictorial Planet and Shoot Film Like A Boss - and of these I would watch you the most. I certainly know less than you do in this area...I will try to add a bit more humility to my comments in the future. Thanks for sharing your birthday wish with us! Sorry you only got one. Hope your enjoying Canada!
@ and please accept my apologies in return. I took your comments a little the wrong way and I apologise. No doubt I do some stupid things sometimes, and believe me, the seemingly constant underexposing is as frustrating for me as it is for you. I often do explain to camera what has gone wrong, but then cut it out for the sake of keeping the video moving. Anyway, thank you for your kind words, I really appreciate it.
I know im not the first one to say it but i think you would be a lot better of shooting paper negatives then contact printing it would be cheaper simpler and more reliable aso you could make unlimited copies of your photos
I'm enjoying the reversal process, but I definitely think that having a second process ready to one side, where if after first development the negative image is clearly not dark enough for reversal, instead of putting it through the process I stop and fix it and set it aside for contact printing. I think some combination of those ideas would be a good shout.
Ha! I know right? It's ok to carry short distances, and it fits in the car ok. Right now I need to travel with the camping table to put it on, I have plans to put a tripod plate into the base and use my steel tripod with a heavy video head.
@@the120ist I have a large dobsonian telescope that has wheelbarrow handles I can attach to move it around. The wheels and tryes are rugged enough for gravelly ground or wet fields. Might be an option.
@@the120ist Message me if you want some pics. I am actually handing it over to a new owner tomorrow morning but I have a few pics of the setup. It does make things a lot easier. Hope you're enjoying Toronto and the separation anxiety isn't too difficult. Been there and done that some years ago!
@@chriscard6544 Interesting, surely toning would darken them overall no? So you're saying bleach away some of the heavy development and then tone after to bring back some contrast?
Interesting. I hadn't really thought of that. I would need a much weaker bleach solution because the one I was using cleared the prints in about a minute, and I'd end up with streaks. I'd need to slow the process right down.
@@the120ist yes, toning will restore some contrast if you went too far with the bleaching. I tested on cyanotypes but never on classical papers (I tone them without bleach)
@@the120ist when toning, I usually only bleach for 10 seconds or so before stopping it with water. You can redevelop it- say sepia tone, or choose to just re fix with Selenium. Alternatively you can use farmers reducer recipes and hypo.
Hey, have you seen Ryan Lee's video on large format reversal? th-cam.com/video/kfo2sdO71sM/w-d-xo.htmlsi=EfU-oG_GxoUA8K4q It raises a couple of questions around your video: 1. Why aren't you using a speedlight? He is getting good exposure on iso 3 paper at f11, with obviously no motion blur since the flash acts as a shutter. 2. Have you considered making your own reversal chemicals? It seems quite cheap and easy to do.
@@peterkingsman hey, thanks for the comments! I have seen Ryan’s video before, and getting images with black and white paper reversal is, as he shows, not too difficult. You should take a look at the first video I did on the subject just over a year ago. Ryan is shooting a head and shoulders shot with a strobe no more than three feet from his subject, and he is positioned similarly close. He’s also using Ilford MGRC, which is more sensitive than the Fomaspeed N312 that I’m using. I’m using this paper to reduce the contrast, there’s a long video on my channel all about it. He’s shooting either 4x5 or 5x7, I forget which now, but which requires significantly shorter distances between lens and paper, therefore losing a lot less light. There are hundreds of factors involved in getting a good exposure. Sadly it’s not just whether or not you have a flash available. It is relatively easy to mix your own chemicals, but I am partnered with Stenopeika, and they send me theirs. 👍
@@the120ist...but just to continue to be annoying for a bit longer...isnt the difference between lens and emulsion between these two scenarios defined in the aperture used, and you would still have 2 stops more representation of the available light on your paper at f/5.6 than Ryan did at f/11 regardless of the longer 'bellows'?
@ 😂😂 don’t stop just when you’re on a roll! But I now read your comments in a different tone, so… yes, you’re right, according to the theory a 5.6 lens should be a 5.6 lens at the given focal length, and therefore until one “extends the bellows” so to speak, no compensation should be needed. Truth is, I’m not 100% sure why this camera seems to need so much more light. Could it be the shape of the box? Or does some other compensation need to be added on account of the overall increase in size? I don’t know. What I do know is that by the time I got a decent exposure I was down to an equivalent ISO of about 0.3, and that’s keeping consistent metering method and tools with all the other testing I’ve done. Honestly, at this stage, I can’t be sure! But I can also tell you that in the next video coming out on the channel (already filmed) I used studio strobes with the same process and it’s not the simple solution I’ve been looking for! More on that to come!
I suppose Ryan is technically treating his paper as approx 0.7 iso, given that he is overexposing by two stops, so I further suppose Fomaslow could be expected to be iso 0.3 in this situation? Is there a lens coating on the lens that could be interacting with the spectral sensitivity of the paper in a limiting way maybe? Looking forward to the next video, I'm very interested in the idea! One of my fonder memories of Canda is fireflies, but I think they may not be around until June.
@@peterkingsman Very brief google suggests that lens coatings became mainstream around the late 1940s... so my guess would be that these Air Ministry lenses were not coated. But was technology back in the 1940s already being commandeered by the military before it hit the consumer markets, as we see everywhere today? Maybe. And the first coatings that would have become mainstream would for sure have been UV filtered. With UV being so important to this process, you may well have a point.
Super cool! The lens cone idea is great! Another idea is to use a small sliding box system attached to the front instead of the lens cone which will enable you to adjust focus on the fly. And with your carpentry skills, making a double sided film holder isn't out of the question! Which would give you the ability to frame and focus with ground glass. I made some 8x10 holders using just a table saw, clamps, and glue...
Those first 2 pics would have worked well as negatives for contact prints. I found indoor paper reversals using artificial lights shoot around ISO 0.4! I think that's because paper is not very sensitive to yellowish light compared to blue/UV light. And calculating in bellows extension is a must when focusing close. I'm estimating that the lens is around 800mm in front of the film plane, so if you're using a 500mm lens, the bellows extension would be 2.5, meaning and extra 1.3 stops in exposure.
Keep going! It's fun seeing you experiment!
Ok so I'm already planning on maybe, after a long project with this camera, making a similar style camera but quite a bit smaller, maybe 8x10 or maybe 11x14, and maybe incorporating some of the concepts you mention, like maybe a ground glass.
You're dead right about the indoor shooting. I haven't found huge differences on previous shoots using paper reversal and artificial lights, but it was so apparent this time around. Definitely daylight is the way forward for this camera at least.
Contact prints are something I haven't really looked into, but several people have mentioned it on previous videos, especially as a way of "saving" under exposed reversals. I'll work on that when I get back, I think I can pretty much know now at the first development stage if it's going to reverse well. So I should have both processes ready, if it doesn't go dark enough then I put it through a standard stop and fix, and contact print laster. Definitely something I'll be trying!
That's some great estimating! Box is 580mm and the cone is 170mm, so 650mm overall. So I definitely didn't give it enough compensation until the final shots! Lesson learned!
There is a 3D element to the last image. This was fun and your wife and kids are such gems for sitting for you.
They were so good. And for a 6 and 8 year old, sitting still for an 8 second exposure, they did an amazing job! I can't wait to get back to it in May and really put the camera and lens to the test!
Phenomenal. Fast forward 200 years. The pioneers of photography still live on. Well done!
Ha! Doesn't get much more basic than this! I think the next plan, after I've done a decent sized project with this one, will be to build something similar but slightly smaller. I have some beautiful c 1900 lenses which would cover probably 12x16 or 11x14. Would be fun to put some of those combos together in a more manageable package!
@@the120ist Yes as you said no a ‘travel’ camera. But I am confident that not many of us have the gumption to build what you have. I’ll stick to what others have manufactured. To that end just bought a reasonable priced Horseman VH (without rangefinder) 6 x9 in minty condition from Japan. Looking forward to getting out with it.
Dont be disapointed. Im very impressed by the built and the print with your friend. The tones and exposure are awesome (I love darker prints) . Bokeh is fantastic. Maybe you explained it but I didnt understand how do you calculate the length of the box. To me it's brilliant built. Im so thrilled.
Thank you so much! I replied to your insta comment, didn't realise you had already watched! Glad you enjoyed it. We're all our own worst critics aren't we? I so wanted that great image to end the video. But so be it, some good results for sure. I'll email you about with the equation, too much to explain here!
@@the120ist no hurry with maths and physics
@@chriscard6544 ha ha! Fairly simple equation actually, I just don't know how to type it so I'll send you screen shot!
Great project! Myself and Ethan Moses of Cameradactyl Cameras have done some B/W reversal work in handmade box cameras. The metering is difficult because the paper is UV & deep blue sensitive but light meters don’t read the UV light, so it requires some extrapolation. In the winter expect less UV in daylight, for example. Ethan has taken to using powerful strobe packs for indoor portraits, you can feel the heat on your face when they fire!
Strobes I think are a good way forward, for sure. There's a video coming up very soon where I use strobes with this process, but on 4x5, and my results were disappointing. I just don't have the power (yet) to make it work. Even double pumping the strobes was only just enough. I'm searching ebay... hold that thought!
@@the120ist Ethan uses huge power supplies with something like 2400 watt-seconds or more, the strobes themselves have giant glass flash tubes with incandescent model lights and fans built in.
Just amazing, very inspiring. It also really shows how photography started. The effort you put into that project is awesome. I was smiling the whole video through. Thanks for sharing
Look into some kind of scisorlift table. Would allow you easier elevation changes and easier to move about
Loving this build! Cant wait to see more
Incredible!
Thanks!
great video. a few years ago, I prototyped with a cardboard sliding camera with a 36" aerial lens and it was fun. for results that are too dark, probably can immerse in a very diluted farmers reducer to get back some details.
Lots of great comments here on rescuing those underexposed images. I definitely think that's something I need to look at on future shoots - either picking them it first development stage and instead of reversing, run them through a standard process and setting them aside as paper negatives for contact printing. Or as you say, farmers reducer, or beaching and toning to recover then after reversing. Seems like I have some more experimenting to do!
that was absolutely amazing that was a lot of hard work you did i think all the photos were great yes you should do this again when you get home in the better weather your images have a great look to them and very artistic i build medium format and 5x4 cameras myself for fun and really patriciate all the work and effort you put into this ive never built anything this big the biggest ive gone was converting and rebuilding a late 1800s half plate camera to modern 5x4 but i prefer to stick to 120 film camera builds from 6x9cm up to 6x12cm and ive a 6x14cm its great to see someone else building cameras thanks for making this video im looking forward to your next one
Congrats😎 Always good when a plan comes together. I look forward to future results. Love the response of the girls when developing🙂
that is really cool camera nice photos don't beat yourself up to much over it.
Yeah looking back they weren’t so bad! I still wanted one perfect one before I parked the project! Ah well!
I think it's fantastic that you achieved what you did. I've just developed my first prints ever using a Johnson's Jumbo Postcard Enlarger and I was over the moon when I got some useable prints out of it. Keep up the good work, I enjoy watching your videos.
Thanks so much! Definitely a very rewarding moment when you get a decent print out of any process! I wish I had had just a little more time to get this to a point where I felt confident I understood the camera. But time waits for no man! I'll be back to this project before you know it!
I'm building a very similar thing, both size and concept... Main difference is that I have a film holder and a matte screen. Also I have two separate boxes, one smaller can slide inside the bigger one, so I can also focus.
this is so cool!! Can't wait to see more photos in the future!
On hold until I get back, but there will definitely be more!!
I have 10" (254mm) f4.5 portrait lens I have used in my 1915 Korona View 8x10 but the poor old thing is not liking being used very often, so I am in the process of building a similar camera. I had not thought about using a lens cone to create a pair of focusing ranges. Very cool camera and now you've given me some new ideas.
Definitely go for it! And if you're making an 8x10 box then it would be soo much easier than this beast. It wasn't a surprise, but the size of the whole process, the trays, the camera, the paper, it all really adds up and makes it exhausting. But I would say an 8x10 would be so much easier to handle. let me know if you do it!
Wow, it's so exciting that I'm speechless) I'm waiting for the continuation as soon as possible, bravo maestro, bravo!!!
Thank you so much! I'm glad you enjoyed it! I can't wait to get back and carry on with the project now. Plus so many great ideas for how I can adapt the concept and expand it. Roll on May!
@@the120ist We are waiting for May!!!!😉😊
Excellent, I like the dark ones of your mate, magical vibe to them.
They're growing on me! As always, if I head meant them to be dark I would have felt better about them! But I was trying for correct exposure and I missed the mark. But with hindsight, and a lot of people in the comments saying they like them, I think I'm feeling better about them!!
O.k. Wow, very cool!
Thanks!
This is amazing - well done! I can't wait to see more from this project.
Thank you! There will be a lot more from this one coming up later in the year!
What a cool project and cool results from your giant "pinhole with a lens." This was great! Happy b'day, and thanks for giving US the present!
isperational! when i get the chance and the courage im going to do the same thing! thankyou sir!
Go for it! If I can do it, anyone can!
@@the120ist ✌
Thats so awesome, I was waiting for this video for long time.
I know it took a long time, I'm sorry! I almost got bored of hearing myself talk about it!! But it was a long project for me, and if I had had the time it would have gone on even longer because I was so not ready to give up! I wanted a perfect image to take away. But it was not to be. I'll be back with this camera in a few months, and we're going to make some awesome images!
Going to make another pitch for you to try making your own gelatin dry plates. You’re already learning about the color sensitivity and speed, and when making your own plates, you can eventually learn to tweak both. Which hopefully will get you to the point where the exposures don’t have to be as long as what you’re dealing with, even with overcast skies. I’ve also built a camera around an air reconnaissance lens (a 24” f/6 beast of a hunk of glass) but mine was made out of cardboard (save the lens mount of course), a sliding box design. Much much flimsier, but it went together in a weekend. After seeing your results, i think I need to make a more rugged one so I can take it outside more easily. Great project!
Your wishes are not going unheard! It's on the list, it's coming! Interestingly, with this camera I could get a glass plate the size of the back easily enough, and I could coat it, after doing some practice with the technique... but I would need to come up with some means of offsetting the focus by the mm thickness of the glass plate. Hmmmm...
@ even a cm or two of sliding capability somewhere in the lens path would give you that. Don’t need a full on helical or anything more complicated. Maybe even just mount the lens cone on coarse thread bolts with a gasket of some kind to allow adjustments. I’m sure you’ll work it out. Looking forward to what you come up with!
Fascinating and great fun project, well done!
Thank you! It was a long road to get there, but the results were worth it. And I can't wait to get back and start a longer project with this camera!
Awesome
Thanks, glad you enjoyed it!
What a great video. Cool project but I do worry for your back. It must have been so cool to see that image appear on the back of the box. My only suggestion would be to add some rails/guides to slot the paper in.
Oh and if you leave it out front of your house your neighbours will think it's a speed camera
Excellent, I think that is a great success, well done. :)
Thank you! I didn't quite get an image I was totally happy with, but I was close. And I'm happy knowing that the camera is going to work, and given a little more time and some better weather, and a little more experience of the lens and what it can do,I think I'm going to be able to get some great images from this! Roll on May!
Great to watch and I do like the results of your bearded friend !
Ha ha, my bearded friend. That is indeed his actual name. Thanks for watching, glad you enjoyed!
Welcome to Toronto. Large film community here. Check out Gallery 44. At first I thought you were going for the Afghan box camera effect, with developing done inside. This looks far more practical. Would it be possible to focus through a small ground glass attached to one side or the top? The framing would be different, of course. But you wouldn't be dependent on the more or less taut strap measure -- and you'd be able to load the paper in the camera beforehand. (Impressive results, all the same.)
Thank you! I've already had a bit of a tour out here, visited Downtown Camera and Henrys and Graination! I'm not sure I'll be doing darkroom work while I'm here, I think that may have to wait until I get back. I think I'll let someone else process my films, will be a nice break from it!
I never considered the Afghan camera option. I have a bit of an OCD hatred of mess, and I would be so concerned about spilling chemicals in the camera! Plus I would have had to have a box the same size but for a smaller print. Pros and cons though!
So the long term plan with this camera is to use the huge black towel which you saw in this video and try to get a decent seal around the top of the camera so that I can load the sheets without taking the camera back into the darkroom. That way I can use a piece of paper against the back wall to frame and focus, and then load the sheet when i'm happy. Then hopefully I can get the exposed sheet into a sleeve and load another one out in the field.
I'm working on how I would make that happen!!
@@the120ist Thanks for the reply. Looking forward to seeing how this progresses. The DIY approach seems to be really paying off.
I would be happy with those pics of your wife and kids. Nice to take with you to Toronto
The last ones turned out ok I thought! Can't wait to get back and start a longer project with this camera... after some more fine tuning to get more reliable results of course!
Brilliant
Thank you! I enjoyed the process, even if it did take me about six months to get there!
This is very interesting.
I have longed for an Afghan camera for years.. There is a youth projects that creates them, both in kit form and assembled. There quiet expensive for a wooden box. But there Labour intensive. Google instant box camera. It's an interesting design & I believe the person running the projects has tested many attempts, before e came to.a wining model.
Many the for bringing this to you tube.
Thanks for watching and commenting! I'll look up those Afghan cameras you mention, but it doesn't surprise me that they seem pricey. Not much to stop you making your own though. I have very limited carpentry skills and equipment, as you saw, but the box is hiding together!
This is fantastic and definitely inspiring. I do have one question though. Why didn’t you use flash on the indoor shot when you had them all set up?
A few people suggesting this... and actually, at time of taking that image indoors, I hadn't tested the process with flash. Since then though I have. The next video coming to the channel I shot before I left the UK, and I do exactly that. And I can tell you, having tried it, that if I had used flash on that indoor shot with the big box camera, it wouldn't have worked. Even using every studio strobe and flashgun that I own all rigged up together, I don't have enough flash power to expose the paper. The general assumption is that you can get more power from a flash than from constant lights, whereas in fact with constant lights you can get a lot more light, if given the time to accumulate exposure. I haven't done the math, but six flash guns and a 400w/s strobe firing together (total of about 700w/s) gave me the equivalent exposure of about 3 seconds of constant lighting with the ones I had set up. So for a seven second exposure we'd be looking at pumping the full flash set up 3 times to get an equivalent exposure!
Hi, could you not cut a small hole in the lens board near the lens to allow you to put your video camera lens in facing the film plane to allow you to preview the composition and focussing?
It's definitely an idea. I'd need to have a piece of white paper against the back to show the image though. And the major problem I have at the moment is having to remove the camera to load the light sensitive paper, and in the process ruining the careful focusing and framing which I've just done! So the first thing I need to fix is being able to load in situ. I have some ideas, and have received some good ideas from others, about maybe keeping the paper packet inside the camera, maybe installing a thin false bottom to prevent reflections. Lots to think about!
...also, have you been consulting a reciprocity failure chart for your emulsion? You seem to be regularily surprised by unexpected recurring underexposure despite careful metering with fancy meter.
...looks like there shouldnt be any significant reciprocity fall off for what you are doing here though, according to a quick google search...
@@peterkingsman that was my understanding from the research I’ve done too.
I show my failures on this channel, I always have. If you would prefer a channel where people hide their mistakes then there are plenty of those for you.
I carefully meter and apply learning from past experience into each exposure. But as mentioned on another reply to you, there are a lot of factors. I don’t always go through every detail in the videos because that would be boring. In this video I added a stop of exposure to the second shoot, but it seems the lights indoors, on this occasion, in contrast to previous instances where I have used artificial light with this process (and indeed as you have suggested I do), have not reacted with the paper in the same way, and my additional exposure on top of the original calculations, resulted in poorly exposed images, as you saw.
As I say, if you would like perfection in every frame, there are lots of channels for you.
@the120ist Hey, thanks for your replies. Im sorry if my comments seemed abrasive or judgemental. I was just trying to be succint and relevant. I greatly appreciate your style of vlogging - of all the photography channels I watch from time to time, yours is in the top three, with Pictorial Planet and Shoot Film Like A Boss - and of these I would watch you the most.
I certainly know less than you do in this area...I will try to add a bit more humility to my comments in the future. Thanks for sharing your birthday wish with us! Sorry you only got one. Hope your enjoying Canada!
@ and please accept my apologies in return. I took your comments a little the wrong way and I apologise. No doubt I do some stupid things sometimes, and believe me, the seemingly constant underexposing is as frustrating for me as it is for you. I often do explain to camera what has gone wrong, but then cut it out for the sake of keeping the video moving. Anyway, thank you for your kind words, I really appreciate it.
I know im not the first one to say it but i think you would be a lot better of shooting paper negatives then contact printing it would be cheaper simpler and more reliable aso you could make unlimited copies of your photos
I'm enjoying the reversal process, but I definitely think that having a second process ready to one side, where if after first development the negative image is clearly not dark enough for reversal, instead of putting it through the process I stop and fix it and set it aside for contact printing. I think some combination of those ideas would be a good shout.
Great little or should I say big project. Have you thought of X ray film and a guillotine shutter?
I have considered x ray film. Never tried it though! One day!
@ I got a load from the US, hopefully it hasn’t been fried by the scanners too much, got the Intrepid 8x10 on order and I ‘ll know then.
I first read UAF and thought it meant „ugly as fuck.“ Nice content like usual!
How in the world are you going to be moving this around ?
Ha! I know right? It's ok to carry short distances, and it fits in the car ok. Right now I need to travel with the camping table to put it on, I have plans to put a tripod plate into the base and use my steel tripod with a heavy video head.
@@the120ist I have a large dobsonian telescope that has wheelbarrow handles I can attach to move it around. The wheels and tryes are rugged enough for gravelly ground or wet fields. Might be an option.
@@liveinaweorg smart
@@liveinaweorg That's an interesting idea. I had planned to just lift it around, but some sort of in built wheeling mechanism is enticing!
@@the120ist Message me if you want some pics. I am actually handing it over to a new owner tomorrow morning but I have a few pics of the setup. It does make things a lot easier.
Hope you're enjoying Toronto and the separation anxiety isn't too difficult. Been there and done that some years ago!
There's typo in video description. "I built a massive pin-hole camera with a lens"!
Bleach them!
smart idea. Bleach and if needed: tone them
@@chriscard6544 Interesting, surely toning would darken them overall no? So you're saying bleach away some of the heavy development and then tone after to bring back some contrast?
Interesting. I hadn't really thought of that. I would need a much weaker bleach solution because the one I was using cleared the prints in about a minute, and I'd end up with streaks. I'd need to slow the process right down.
@@the120ist yes, toning will restore some contrast if you went too far with the bleaching. I tested on cyanotypes but never on classical papers (I tone them without bleach)
@@the120ist when toning, I usually only bleach for 10 seconds or so before stopping it with water. You can redevelop it- say sepia tone, or choose to just re fix with Selenium. Alternatively you can use farmers reducer recipes and hypo.
Hey, have you seen Ryan Lee's video on large format reversal?
th-cam.com/video/kfo2sdO71sM/w-d-xo.htmlsi=EfU-oG_GxoUA8K4q
It raises a couple of questions around your video:
1. Why aren't you using a speedlight? He is getting good exposure on iso 3 paper at f11, with obviously no motion blur since the flash acts as a shutter.
2. Have you considered making your own reversal chemicals? It seems quite cheap and easy to do.
@@peterkingsman hey, thanks for the comments! I have seen Ryan’s video before, and getting images with black and white paper reversal is, as he shows, not too difficult. You should take a look at the first video I did on the subject just over a year ago.
Ryan is shooting a head and shoulders shot with a strobe no more than three feet from his subject, and he is positioned similarly close.
He’s also using Ilford MGRC, which is more sensitive than the Fomaspeed N312 that I’m using. I’m using this paper to reduce the contrast, there’s a long video on my channel all about it.
He’s shooting either 4x5 or 5x7, I forget which now, but which requires significantly shorter distances between lens and paper, therefore losing a lot less light.
There are hundreds of factors involved in getting a good exposure. Sadly it’s not just whether or not you have a flash available.
It is relatively easy to mix your own chemicals, but I am partnered with Stenopeika, and they send me theirs. 👍
@@the120ist...but just to continue to be annoying for a bit longer...isnt the difference between lens and emulsion between these two scenarios defined in the aperture used, and you would still have 2 stops more representation of the available light on your paper at f/5.6 than Ryan did at f/11 regardless of the longer 'bellows'?
@ 😂😂 don’t stop just when you’re on a roll! But I now read your comments in a different tone, so… yes, you’re right, according to the theory a 5.6 lens should be a 5.6 lens at the given focal length, and therefore until one “extends the bellows” so to speak, no compensation should be needed. Truth is, I’m not 100% sure why this camera seems to need so much more light. Could it be the shape of the box? Or does some other compensation need to be added on account of the overall increase in size? I don’t know. What I do know is that by the time I got a decent exposure I was down to an equivalent ISO of about 0.3, and that’s keeping consistent metering method and tools with all the other testing I’ve done. Honestly, at this stage, I can’t be sure! But I can also tell you that in the next video coming out on the channel (already filmed) I used studio strobes with the same process and it’s not the simple solution I’ve been looking for! More on that to come!
I suppose Ryan is technically treating his paper as approx 0.7 iso, given that he is overexposing by two stops, so I further suppose Fomaslow could be expected to be iso 0.3 in this situation? Is there a lens coating on the lens that could be interacting with the spectral sensitivity of the paper in a limiting way maybe?
Looking forward to the next video, I'm very interested in the idea!
One of my fonder memories of Canda is fireflies, but I think they may not be around until June.
@@peterkingsman Very brief google suggests that lens coatings became mainstream around the late 1940s... so my guess would be that these Air Ministry lenses were not coated. But was technology back in the 1940s already being commandeered by the military before it hit the consumer markets, as we see everywhere today? Maybe. And the first coatings that would have become mainstream would for sure have been UV filtered. With UV being so important to this process, you may well have a point.